Re: Do you ever wish bourbon did not contain ethanol?

I feel it is more of a attribute more than a detriment itself as far as the topic goes.I believe that every spirit shows it's nuances in quite different ways especially with the way evaporation of alcohol/methanol as in part towards the finish whether it be difference between proof or level of char within the barrel all show differently.To me the finish is one of the key factors in enjoyment and without this the true spirit of one's chosen pour would be greatly effected or even lost.

"To deny our own impulses is to deny the very thing that makes us human."
Larry Wachowski​

Re: Do you ever wish bourbon did not contain ethanol?

Originally Posted by SFS

And that thought is at the center of my question Alan. I don't agree that the effect of the ethanol is nice, or desirable. I would prefer it be absent. I treat the effect as the price of admission - it's unfortunately required to have the experience of that specific taste.

Mock all you want Chuck, but I think you missed my point (though I appreciate your concern about me being a dangerously self-deluded alcoholic playing Russian roulette - hope everything is okay at your end). Your generalization that "the psychoactive effect of the ethenol [sic] is essential to the experience" is not true for everyone. It is precisely the opposite of essential to me. That's kinda why I started the thread. If that wasn't clear from the OP, perhaps that's because the ethanol had an effect. See my point?

Your smug and aggressive defensiveness tells me all I need to know. Good day, sir.

Re: Do you ever wish bourbon did not contain ethanol?

Originally Posted by SFS

I don't agree that the effect of the ethanol is nice, or desirable. I would prefer it be absent. I treat the effect as the price of admission - it's unfortunately required to have the experience of that specific taste.
... If that wasn't clear from the OP, perhaps that's because the ethanol had an effect. See my point?

OK, given that we understand the very simple premise of the thread (whiskey taste good, alcohol bad), is it possible that you need to revisit the concept of a false dichotomy? Because the premise clearly involves a dichotomy, and we (me, Brad, Chuck, and others) are proposing that it is a false one. For better or worse, you have not responded to this false-dichotomy proposal. Being arrogant, naturally, I am pretty sure that I am right, but I would be interested to hear what you have to say about it nonetheless.

To be clear, a false dichotomy is a construct in which the speaker (you, in this case) draws up an arbitrary categorical division that does that match the real situation he / she is attempting to describe. Very often, false dichotomies involve basic conceptual confusions or discrepancies.

For example, saying 'I like heat, but I wish I could have heat without energy' is a false dichotomy. Heat IS just a kind of energy; the two concepts are inseparable, so the false dichotomy involves a conceptual confusion.

We are saying, in short, that [whiskey tastes vs. alcohol effects] is a false dichotomy. The effects of alcohol ARE A PART OF the taste experience of a given whiskey. To assume that they can be separated indicates basic conceptual misunderstanding about what the total effects of alcohol are.

Originally Posted by SFS

Why didn't I think of that? I don't have any Barton's, but I'm going to try this with that swill called OGD114. I'll report back.

Surely you can see this is true - especially if you like OGD114. Even if, hypothetically, boiling the whiskey wouldn't basically alter the flavor in some entirely different and unaccountable way, we could totally account for the loss of flavor that OGD114 would suffer if you removed all of the alcohol!

Originally Posted by ILLfarmboy

Alcohol is essential to how you experience the taste of whiskey. But lets not conflate that with its intoxicating effects.

If, on the other hand, you mostly just wish that you didn't get drunk so fast, that makes sense. But again (refer back to several posts in this thread), that pleasure effect of intoxication is totally inseperable from the immediate taste of the whiskey - that's just how the brain / human psychology works (Chuck seems to know a more impressive term for what I am talking about).